For the archive - this was peter responding to Sam. On 1/13/02 8:45 AM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have I ever blocked anybody moving anything to commons? > > Yes I would love to particpate in commons but I probably wont because I > consider the management process of it broken. > > Consider this - how many committers are there in commons atm - 10, 20, 30 ? > Now to get a new project moved you need a 3/4 vote - lets be generous and say > about 12 votes!!!!! That seems real likely. And we are looking at changing that we recognize that is starting to become a hurdle. Things change. Things evolve. We learn. > > Then you have the joy that every commons committer has voting rights on > everything - even code they have never contributed and never will - sounds > like a great "meritocracy" - right? Mmmmm, just the sort of thing we are > meant to be promoting. I also agree - I am uncomfortable with that, and have been from day one. To be fair though, it hasn't resulted in any huge problems yet. I do think that having all the commons committers be involved with things like deciding what can be a commons component is a good thing and should be preserved (with the modification of the 3/4ths rule - the idea should be they *can* participate - not must...). Having all in every issue doesn't seem to scale. > So yes theres buckets of stuff in ant, in excalibur and at home that I would > love to move to commons but that aint going to happen till its fixed or if > ever. > > Considering you seem to be accusing me of blocking progress in commons I want > you to explain it in real simple terms how I am doing it? I seem to be a bit > think and can't quite figure it out. -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting "He who throws mud only loses ground." - Fat Albert -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
